


04 




g55. 







aass_-L 4 3 



"*f 



SPEECH 



OF 



EOS. SALMOS P. CHASE 



DELIVERED AT THE 



REPUBLICAN MASS MEETING 



In Cincinnati, August 21, 1855 ; 



TOGETHER WITH EXTRACTS FROM HIS SPEECHES IN THE SENATE 
ON KINDRED SUBJECTS. 



PRINTED BY THe'^O^HW^^A^E^JOURNAL COMPANY. 

18 5 5. 



MR. CHASE'S SPEECH 

AT THE REPUBLICAN MASS MEETING, 
ClDcionat], Aagast 21, 1S55. 



Mr. Chairman and Ftllnw Cititens : 

More than thirty years have passed away 
Bince I, thea a mere boy, became a dweller ia 
this city. Few of those whom I now see before 
me have been here so long: to none of you, I 
am sure, is the prosperity of this beautiful city, 
or the advancement, in all respects, of her noble 
institutions, more dear. A boy citizen of the 
city before most of you were born, I have wit- 
nessed her progress with mingled pride, joy and 
gratitude; and in roy measure and sphere have 
diligently sought, and shall always seek, to pro- 
mote her welfare. Here in Cincinnati are all 
my interests centered. If she prospers. I par- 
take in her prosperity. If she suffers, I, as well 
as the rest of you, must share the reverse. 

Bound thus to you by common interests, and 
common hopes, and common affections, I stand 
before you to night in a position which, not 
many months since, I little dreamed of occupy- 
ing: as the nominee of a great and powerful 
party for a high and responsible position-— not 
one, it is true, invested with any control over 
Legislative action, nor indeed with any consid- 
erable power of any kind; but high and respect- 
able nevertheless, because he who tills it must 
be taken to represent, in the great leading prin- 
ciples which he avows, the opinions of the people 
by whom he is elected. 

You are aware, fellow citizens, that it has been 
my fortune, since my nomination as a candidate 
for Governor, to be assailed with envenomed bit- 
terness. My whole past life — my entire politi- 
cal history has been ransacked for topics of accu- 
sation. Why I am thus pursued it seems hard 
to conjecture. I have never been the enemy of 
those who now start u;-» as my enemies. They 
have suffered no wrong, no unkindness from me. 
And while I do not claim any immunity from 
error or freedom from faults, I dare boldly say 
that there is nothing in my political life which 
I hesitate to submit to the severest scrutiny. 

The convention which placed me in nomina- 
tion was composed of citizens from all political 
organizations, united by a common determina- 
tion to resist the aggressions of the Slave Power, 
and especially to right the great wrong of the 
repeal of the Missouri Restriction. Among its 
members were numerous citizens whose expe- 
rience in public affairs, genuine love of country 
and eminent abilities, entitled them to that 
large share of public confidence which they en- 



joyed. By this convention, and by a majority 
unusually large. I was placed in nomination. I 
had asked no human being to support me. I 
had even sought the permission of my friends 
to withdraw my name from tiie canvass, i 
would cheerfully and zealously have supported 
either of the distinguished gentlemen who were 
proposed for nomination. Nominated under 
such circumstances, I could not but be sensible 
that it was not because of any superior merit of 
mine, but because circumstance which have 
transpired during the last two years hare iden- 
tified me with a strgggle in which the peo- 
ple of the country take a deep and abiding 
interest. In the Senate of the United States I 
have labored incessantly and to the uttermost 
of my ability to resist and arrest the greatest 
outrage of our generation, the ruthless subver- 
sion of that guarantee of Free Institutions 
which our Fathers !iad provided for the North- 
west in the Missouri Prohibition. It was to 
mark its owu abhorrence of this outrage, and to 
afford to the people of Ohio an opportunity of 
testifying their al>horrence of it, that the con- 
vpution selected me as the standard bearer of 
Freedom during the political campaign in which 
we are now engaged. 

It gratifies me to know that whatever may 
have been the political diiferences lietween my- 
self and great numbers of those whom the Re- 
peal of the Missouri Prohibiton aroused to a 
lively sense of the necessity of resisting the ag- 
gressions of Slavery, the vast majority of the 
People who united last fhll in the People's 
movement against Slavery, acquiesced cheerful- 
ly in the action of the Convention, and are giv- 
ing me a cordial and vigorous support. Dis- 
contented men there must be in all organiza- 
tions. In an organization like ours, such men 
are necessarily somewhat more numerous than 
in^parties hardened by time and consolidated 
by interest. Opposition from such men was to 
be expected ; and such opposition we encounter. 

We had a right, however, to expect that it 
would be conducted with fairness and candor. I 
had a right to expect that in dealing with my pulv 
lic conduct and character, the obligations ot truth 
and justice would not be wholly disiegarded. 
But the most reckless charges are^perseveringly 
made, without foundation. These charges are 
not all new. Some of them are old calumnies 
revived for the new occasion. 



Hitherto, fellow citizens, I have never noticed 
these calumnies. My lime, I thought, might be 
more profitably devoted to the public service. 
I felt, also, an abiding confidence that if it 
i^hould please God lo continue my life, I should 
live down these imputatious ; while, on the oth- 
er hand, if I descended to a premature grave, 
Death, the great revealer, would bury all these 
calumnies in my grave. 

T!)e position in which I now stand before the 
P'MJide of Ohio, imposes upon me, however, a 
diiferent duty. As the representative of a 
great political organization, which may receive 
damage from a belief in the truth of these char- 
ges, it becomes my duty to repe! them. I breaii, 
therefore tlie sileuce which I sbould prefer to 
maintain, and will reply briefly but decisively 
to tbtse accusations. 

Y<iu, my fellow citizens, are my judges. Yea 
conslitule that great tribunal of the country to 
which every public man must appeal. I know 
you are just. My appeal is to your justice. I 
do not invoke your sympathy. I wish only to 
be assured, and of that I am assured, that in 
your hearts there is no disposition to condemn 
me unheard, without reason and against proof. 

The first charge which I shall dispose of to- 
night, relates to my election to the Senate six 
years ago. It has been made in this place, 
from the platform, during my absence in the 
Eastern States, and reiterated in the public 
prints by the same accuser. I never saw a pa- 
per containing tills revamped accusation over a 
respouPii)le name, until to day. I mean to re- 
ply to it frankly, to-night. It would have giv- 
en me more pleasure could I have seen the au- 
thor, and convinced him of it before. But as 
that has been impossible, I now repel it public- 
ly, and leave it to the author to retract it if he 
sees fit. 

The charge is this : that Messrs. Townshend 
and Randall decided the constitutional question 
whether Mes.srs. Fugh and Pierce, or Messrs. 
Spencer and Rnnyan, were entitled to seats in 
the Ohio Legislature, at the 'session of 1848-9, 
in favor of Messrs, Pugh and Pierce, in consid- 
eration that " Mr. Chase should be elected to 
the United States Senate ;" that " this decision 
was in pursuance of express contract, reduced 
to writing, signed b'y the parties;" that "this 
contract was in Mr. Chase's own hand-writing, 
and for many months on exhil)iliou at a print- 
ing oHice in this city." This is the charge. 

Now, it so happens that Mr. Randall was not 
a member of the House, but of the Senate, that 
winter, and uniformly from fir.st to last oppo- 
sed my election. This, however, is an inaccu- 
racy which is only worth mentioning, because it 
shows how carlessly the charge was made. It 
is with the main cliarge that 1 have to deal, and 
thatcliarge 1 meet witli a broad, unqualified de- 
nial of its truth. No such contract was ever 
made. No such decisjcni was ever made upou 
any such consideration. No such contract ex- 
i>ls or ever exi.-'led in my handwriting, or in t!)e 
hai;dwriling of any i)iidy (;l.-e. I will not say 
that the maker of the ctiar;;e did not believe it 
to bo true; fur I will not f(dlo\v hisexam[ile, and 
impeach motives; but I will say that thi; charge 
was ra!-hly and curelesaly made -more rashly 



and carelessly than became a man who has once 
occupied a judicial station. It is untrue iu all 
its parts. 

What was the transaction which actually took 
place? The Legislature had passed an act di- 
viding Hamilton county into two districts, and 
had assigned to the county five Representatives 
— two to be elected by the city district and 
three by the county district. The democrats 
denied the constitutionality of this division, and 
voted for five Representatives from the whole 
county. The whigs. on the otiier haad, asser- 
ted its constitutionality, and voted for two 
Representatives from the city district, and for 
three from the county district. The democrats 
hid a majority in the wifole county; the whigs 
had a majority in the city district. If the act 
was constitutional therefore, the whigs had 
elected two members; if the act was uncons- 
titutional the democrats had elected five. — 
The question finally assumed this form: are 
Messrs. Speucer and Runyou, whigs, having re- 
ceived a majority of votes in the city district, 
entitled to seats as Representatives from Ham- 
ilton county, or are Messrs. Pugh and Pierce, 
who received a majority of all the votes ia the 
county, entitled to those seats? 

Now, the House of Representatives is the sole 
judge, under the Constitution, of the returns 
and qualifications of its members. The question 
which arose was therefore to be decided by the 
House, and by the House alone. If the House 
should adjudge the division law unconstitu- 
tional, the two democrats must necessarily be 
admitted to their seats — ^if constitutional, the 
whigs must be admitted. 

Now, the question whether this division law 
was constitutional or not had been much deba- 
ted. Some eminent whigs had declared that 
the Legislature possessed no power to divide 
counties for election purposes. Of this opinion 
were nearly all the democrats. The great ma- 
jority of the whigs asserted the contrary po- 
sition. 

It was my opinion, never concealed from any 
body, that the Legislature possessed no power 
to divide a county. It is now no sort of conse- 
quence whether this opinion was right or wrong. 
1 oidy mention it because I understand that 
some persons have been reckless enough to say 
that I declared myself at first in favor of the 
division, and afterwards took the opposite 
ground. 

Well, the constitutional question which then 
arose was decided in favor of the democratic 
claimants, and they were admitted to their 
seats. And it was this decision which is al- 
leged to have been " made upon express con- 
tract, reduced to writing" — ''in Mr. Chase's own 
hand writing." 

If there were truth in this charge, no man 
should vote for me for any office. Such a con- 
tract would be as oVyectionable as a contract 
with a Judge, that some friend or relation 
should be appointed to an ofiice in considera- 
tion of a jutlieial decision in favor of parties 
able to control the appointment. I give up 
such a character to whatever reprobation my 
assailant may choose to bestow upon it. But, I 
repeat, no such condemnation touches me. The 



charge that such a contract was written by me 

that such a coatract was written by any body 

that eucb a coatract was «ver made at all — 

has not a word of truth in it. No such writing 
exists, unless such a writing has been forged 
for villainous ends. Neither I nor any friend 
of mine knew how either of the gentlemen then 
admitted to feats would vote in the Senatorial 
election, until weeks afterwards. The gentle- 
men live among you. and one of them (Mr. 
Pugh) is my successor in the Senate ; the other 
(Mr. Pierce) is well known in this coinmunity. 
Both are now political opponents of mine — hut 
neither would hesitate to speak the truth in this 
behalf. Why did not my assailants ascertain the 
truth from them before they ventured upon his 
accusation? Was it fair, or just, or manly, to 
seek the injury of me, who had never injured 
bim, by making charges, even though he be- 
lieved "them to be well-founded, without the 
ability to produce evidence in support of that 
belief ? Let him now produce his evidence, if 
he has any, or let him retract his accusation. 
I defy him or any other accuser to show in my 
whole action in reference to this matter of my 
election, any deviation whatever trom the path 
which honor or duty would prescribe. 

It is true that my election, as well as all the 
other elections of that winter, were effected 
through the joint action of the Democratic and 
Independent Democratic orFreesoil members of 
the Legislature ; and that this joint action was 
the result of a political understanding or ar- 
rangement. There were three parties in the Leg- 
islature—the Old Line Democrats, the Inde- 
pendent Democrats or Freesoilers, and the Whigs. 
The Freesoilers were anxious to have a Senator 
independent of old party organizations, who 
would resist the aggressions of the slave Power, 
without being trammeled by party associations. 
They did not care what party the Judges of the 
Supreme Court should belong to, provided they 
were qualified for their stations. They were 
willing to elect Whig Judges or Democratic 
Judges, if otherwise capable and fit, provided 
either Whigs or Democrats would unite with 
them in the election of an Independent Senator. 
The Whigs could not agree to vote for any man 
whom the Freesoilers wished to elect — the Dem- 
ocrats were willing to vote for me. Of course 
I was elected. On the same day Judge Spald- 
ing and Caldwell were elected to the Supreme 
Bench. The former is now among the ablest 
and truest champions of the Republican cause 
— the other enjoys the confidence and respect of 
the People in as large a measure as he. This 
was the whole arrangement, so far as Senator 
and Supreme Judges were concerned. 

There was a further understanding in refer- 
ence to the other appointments to be made by 
the Legislature. I do not remember its details, 
I do remember, however, that ttie plan which I 
thought equitable, and which I took the liberty 
of suggesting to some prominent members of 
the Legislature, was to elect Associate Judges 
for the counties according to the political char- 
acter of the respective counties, as indicated by 
the pluralities at the Presidential election — giv- 
ing to counties where Democrats had plurali- 
ties, Democratic Associates ; to Whig counties 



Whig Associates, and to Freesoil counties, Free- 
soil Associates. Such, however, was the force 
of party feeling, that the suggestion was disre- 
garded, and the Associate Judges, as well as all 
other public officers, to be appointed by the 
Legislature, were selected from the Democratic 
and Freesoil parties. 

Now, will anybody tell me how any appoint- 
ments at all could have been made without 
some such union as actually took place ? No 
one could be appointed to any office, without a 
majority of votes. Neither party by itself 
had a majority. Each party by itself was in a 
minority. To effect any appointments at all 
therefore, two of the minorities must unite. 
They would naturally and almost uecessarily 
select their appointees from one or the other of 
the parties represented by them. This is what 
actually took place, and this is all that did take 
place at the session of 18-iS-'49. The union 
was then between the Democrats and Freesoil- 
ers. The very next session the Legislature was 
again divided between the same three parties, 
neither having a majority. What then took 
place ? The Whigs and Democrats made an 
agreement for united action, and divided the 
appointments between Whigs and Democrats, 
excluding the Freesoilers altogether. 

The ditference between the last arrangement 
and the first was only in the fact that the for- 
mer was between parties holding at that time 
the same general political principles, though 
differing in organization, while the latter was 
between parties decidedly opposed in principle 
as well as in organization. 

After all, the great question in regard to ap- 
pointments made by such unions, is the same 
as that which should be made in respect to ap- 
pointments made by a majority party : — Are 
the appointees fit and capable? Do they rep- 
resent the principles — will they be faithful to 
the interests of the People of the State ? It is of 
very little consequence whether they represent 
a majority organization or not. 

Now, as to the J udges appointed at the ses- 
sion of lS48-'9, I have heard no complaint. It 
is not denied that they were all able and upright 
men. As to the fitness or capability of the 
Senator, it is not for me to speak. It is enough 
for me to know, that during my term of service, 
no one las reproached me with want of fidelity, 
either to the interests or to the people of 
Ohio. No one accuses me of having lost an 
opportunity of promoting the interests either of 
the State or of this great city, or of any place 
or citizen needing my services. It was my hand 
which drafted the first appropriation for the 
erection of Public Buildings in the West for 
the accommodation of Customs, the Courts, 
and the Post Offices in the United States. In 
virtue of that first appropriation, the United 
States Public Buildings are now rising in this 
city. Similar structures are soon to be erected 
under provisions drafted by me, in several of 
the Lake cities. Through my exertions a bill 
to cede to the State all the Public Lands of the 
United States was twice carried through the 
Senate. Uniformly, zealously, perseveringly I 
have supported the policy of improving the 
Rivers and Harbors of the West. Through 



the weary hours of the night I hare ■watched, 
even till the dawn of day, for an opportunity 
to propose an appropriation for these and other 
objects beneficiaL to Ohio. During the very 
last session, I had the pleasure of carrying 
through the Senate an approropriation of two 
hundred thousand dollars for the improvement 
of the Ohio, and tWHiuyfive thousand dollars 
a year to make the Louisville and Portland Ca- 
nal free, and keep it in repair. Let me be par- 
doned, fellow-citizens, fur referring to them. — 
I do it only that you may be induced to ac- 
quaint yourselves with the whole course of my 
public life. I feel a proud consciousness that 
it will bear investigation, and the more you 
investigate, the less you will be -willing to per- 
mit one who has served you faithfully to be 
prejudiced iu your esteem by misrepresentation 
and detraction. 

I shall proceed now to expose another ground- 
less charge. I find copied in the Ohio States- 
man a resolution which it is alleged sanctions 
the doctrine that a public officer may take an 
oath to support the Constitution of the United 
States, with a mental reservation that he will 
set at nought any part of it which, in his judg- 
ment, is inconsistent with moral duty. I will 
read the resolution if any one desires it. (Cries 
of Read, Read.) Here it is : 

"JResolvtd, That we hereby give it to be dis- 
tinctly understood that Abolitionists'" — [here 
the' Statesman editor inserts the injunction to 
his readers, 'Mark the emphatic and deliberate 
language'] — "considering that the strength of 
our cause lies in its righteousness, and our hopes 
for it in our conformity to the laws of God and 
our support of the rights of man, we owe to the 
Sovereign Ruler of the universe as a proof of our 
allegiance to Him in all our civil relations and 
ofBces, whether as friends, citizens, or as public 
functionaries sworn to support the Constitution 
of the United States, to regard and treat the 
third clause of the instrument, whenever ap- 
plied in the case of a fugitive slave, as utterly 
null and void, and consequently as forming no 
part of the Constitution, whenever we are called 
upon or sworn to support it." 

Now the editor of the Statesman, in the ar- 
ticle from which I have ju.st read, speaking of 
this very resolution, ?ays: " We happen to have 
at our hand a resolution, drawn by his own 
hand and presented by him to a State Conven- 
tion of his old peculiar party, in which he ap- 
plies the term Abolitionist to him.^elf and his 
party. In this resolution Mr. Chase confesses it 
to be his duty as an Abolitionist, "when he 
takes an oath to support the Constitution of the 
United States, to resolve at the same time to vi- 
olate a portion of that iustrument.'' He theu 
quote.s the resolution itself just as I have read it. 
Now, fellow-citizens, would anybody suppose 
that a charge like this would be deliberately 
put forth witiiout a single particle of evidence 
ill support it? Observe how circumstantial it 
jp : — " We happen to have at hand a resolution 
drawn by his own /I'lnd.'' Would you not sup- 
pose that the editor had lying befm-e him a res- 
olution in my hand writing? (Cries of Yes, 
certainly.) What then must you think of this 
editor, when I tell you neither this resolution 



nor any similar one was ever written by me at 
all. (Laughter.) I uuder.'<tuiid that he has 
since explained that he only meant to be under- 
stood as saying ttiat he hart at hand a printed 
resolution, the original of which was written 
by me. But 1 ncvrr wrote the resolution at all, 
and he ought to know it. 

Why, this resolutioii wa" fir.tt attributed to 
me some ten yearns ajo in the Cincinnati Ga- 
zette, then edited by Judge Ji-lin C. Wright. I 
knew him to be an upright and hononii-le gen- 
tleman, and that he mu-^t have been nii.sinforra- 
ed. I therefore addressed a note to him deny- 
ing the authorship, which was printed iu the 
Gazette. There I supposed the thing would re.st. 
Some years afterward?, however, wheu 1 enter- 
ed the Senate of the United States, some wretch- 
ed scavenger, such as the North always furnish- 
es to purvey materials for attacks on Northern 
men who will not bow the knee to the Slave 
Power, raked up this resolution and handed it 
to Mr. Butler of South Carolina, who made it 
the basis of an assault upon me. I repelled the 
charge at once, and so decisively that it was 
never afterwards alluded to even in the Senate. 
Here is part of what I said, taken from the Ap- 
pendix to the Congressional Globe for 18-t9. -ikl 
am not sorry, Mr. President, that the Senator 
from South Carolina has deemed my humble 
life worthy of his investigation. He can find 
nothing in the history of that life which I am 
unwilling to have known — nothing in any opin- 
ions advanced by me which I am not ready to 
defend. But, Sir, I do not choose to be held re- 
sponsible for opinions not mine. This newspa- 
per ascribes to me the paternity of a resolution 
supposed to recognize the propriety of a mental 
reservation in a certain case. I have only to 
say that I never proposed the resolution — never 
voted for the resolution — never would propose 
or vote for such a resolution." 

Later in the same debate, in reply to some in- 
quiry from Senator Mason of Virginia, I said : 

"The resolution was presented at a mass con- 
vention of what was called the Liberty party. 
I was present, and was a member of the com- 
mittee on Resolutions. The resolution in ques- 
tion was submitted to this committee, who de- 
clined to report it for the action of the conven- 
tion. It was opposed by me in the committee 
room, but I cannot say how far the action of 
the committee was attributed to this. It was 
afterwards introduced to the convention when 
I was not prt'sent, and was adopted, after a 
speech, as often happens iu such cases, without 
discussion or examination. It did not express, 
in my judgment, the views of the convention 
or of the party. Is the Senate satisfied ?" 

To this question Mr. Mason responded, "Per- 
fectly, sir," and there the matter rested. 

Now the editor of the State.'</nan is an active 
and veteran politician. Is it possible that the 
refutation of this charge in the Gazette and in. 
the Senate could have escaped his notice ? His 
own files furnish the evidence that it did not. 
Not only so, Inil after the correcliou in the 
speech to which I have just referred, he noticed 
its occurrence iu the Statesman, slated that I 
denied the charge made, and that "Southern 
members expressed themselves satisfied." 



What excuse, under these circumstances, can 
the editor of the Stategmau give for reviving 
this charge? Why, if it was made iuadvertent- 
Jy, has he not manfully and honorably retract- 
ed it? The great English poet, enumerating the 
different degrees of falsehood, mentions the lie 
circumstantial, the lie inferential, etc , and tin- 
ally the lie direct. This lie in the Statesman 
may not come under the third head, but certain- 
ly, if uttered understindingly and persevered 
in after a knowledge of the facts, is included 
in both the others. 

Next comes the charge of Dipunionism. This 
is the great cry by which the adherents ot the 
administration.'irabecile lor good and powerful 
only for evil, hope to arrest the great popular 
movement for freedom, which endangers their 
political ascendency. This too is the cry by 
which the bolters from the ranks of the People 
seek to justify the aid and comfort which they 
give to the administration party in the State 
and in the Nation. This cry is directed against 
me alone, not because I hold any opinion or 
propose any course of action not held or propos- 
ed by every other nominee upon our State tick- 
et, but because they well know that if they can 
defeat the Republican nominee for Governor, 
future union among the opponents of the State 
and National Administrations will be rendered 
well nigh impossible, and the power and pat- 
ronage ot the State and Nation will be perma- 
nently secured to the party which now exercises 
and abuses both. 

But this accusation is as groundless as the 
others. I a disunionist ! Much that I have 
written, much that I have spoken, has found its 
way into the public prints. Many addresses 
and speeches of mine have been published and 
widely circulated. What I have said in the 
Senate remains and must remain in the public 
records of the country, open to the inspection 
of all men. Let my accusers point to a single 
paragraph, a single sentence, a single word, 
containing a disunion sentiment. Let tliem 
point to a single paragraph or a single sen- 
tence upon the subject of the Union, that is 
not full of loyalty to it. Let them do this, or 
else forever hereafter hold their peace. 

N"o man, fellow-citizens, cherishes a warme 
or more earnest devotion to the Union of these 
States, than the man who now stands before 
you. Founded on the principles of the Decla- 
ration of Independence, cemented by the Con 
stitution, and protected by the patriotism of the 
People, it seems to me fit to endure forever. 
God himself prepared this place for it. In the 
place which he prepared, our Fathers framed it. 
Here it has expanded, and strengthened as it 
has grown into a mighty confederacy of thirty- 
one States, stretching from the gulf of Mexico 
to the Northern extremity of Maine, and from 
the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. Its great 
Mountains and their vast range from North to 
South, seem to keep guard over it. Grand 
Rivers flowing through every part, unite, while 
they divide its States. Iron bands, provided 
by the genius of commerce, gird all round the 
mighty structure. Nothing but madness and 
folly, trampling on freedom, and contemning 
justice, can ever justify, can ever destroy or 



weaken it. God grant that it may endure for- 
ever, a monument of his goodness, of the wis- 
dom of our Fathers and the patriotism of their 
sons. 

It is true, fellow-citizens, that in both sec- 
tions of our country, there are men who lightly 
esteem the Union. Mr. Garrison and his asso- 
ciates in the North, despairing of the redemp- 
tion of our land from the evils of Slavery, 
while the Union remains, seek the deliverance 
of the Slave through its dissolution. With the 
disunion doctrines of Mr. Garrison and his as- 
sociates, I have no sympathy. The nuUifiers of 
the South, insisting that through the Union the 
system of Slavery is endangered, cry also for 
dissolution. With the disunion doctrines of the 
nuUifiers of the South, I have no sympathy. 

But there is one remarkable difference be- 
tween those who cry disunion in the North, and 
those who utter the same cry in the South. 
The disunionists of the North take no part in 
political conflicts, and exert no political influ- 
ence. The disunionists of the South engage 
actively in political strife, and at the present 
moment control the action of that party in the 
Slave States which dictates to the present ad- 
ministration its policy of slave propagandism. 

I have a sample of the sentiments of the 
Slave State disunionists, taken from the Charles- 
ton Mercury, a paper which sustains Franklin 
Pierce. It is an account of a meeting of a party 
of these nuUiflers at Whippy Swamp — sugges- 
tive name — in South Carolina. It was held on 
the 4th of July, and this was one of the ap- 
plauded sentiments : 

"The Bay we celebrate — It was consecrated 
to Freedom by the Disunionists of 1776. We 
do well to keep the day — we should do better to 
imitate the deed.-' 

These gentlemen of Whippy Swamp, you see, 
not only brand our Fathers who made the Un- 
ion, as disunionists, but broadly intimate that 
our Republican Government is as obnoxious to 
them as the British Monarchy, and propose to 
get rid of it by disunion ! 

Have our political opponents — the supporters 
of the existing State and National administra- 
tions — any thing to say against the Whippy 
Swamp disunionists ? Do you not know that 
when they say any thing at all of these men, 
they always speak under the whole apprehen- 
sions which the name of Whippy Swamp inevit- 
ably suggests ? Do you not know that when 
the Whippy Swamp disunionists get to Wash- 
ington, they are invited to the highest seats at 
the Democratic — I beg pardon — the Administra- 
tion feast ? Do you not know that from the 
Whippy Swamp disunionists ai'e selected Chiefs 
of Committees in the Senate and in the House 
of Representatives, Foreign Ministers, and heads 
of Departments ? Why, the disunionists of 
Whippy Swamp are the rulers of our National 
Rulers. Not in the N'orth — not in free Ohio, 
where the Nebraska-Kanzaa outrage was greet- 
ed with thunder tones of indignation— does the 
National Administration find its chief strength 
and main support, but in the Whippy Swamps 
of the Carolinas and the Slave States. 

This disunionism is very tolerable to our po- 



8 



litical opponents ; for these disunionists supply 
their leaders. 

Btit neither this disunionism nor any disun- 
ionism is acceptable to me. 

In Whippy Swamp, and elsewhere in South 
Carolina, there are expert calculators of the val- 
ue of the Union. Their political economists and 
political mathematicians have cyphered it all 
out. They can tell you how much the Union is 
worth to a very vulgar fraction. 

I have no skill iu such computations, and I 
want none. Standing in the Senate, and aa- 
dressing its presiding officer as your Represen- 
tative, fellow-citizens, I said : '• Mr. President, 
I have never calculated the value of the Union. 
I know of no arithmetic by which the computa- 
tion can be made. We of the West are in the 
habit of looking upon the Uuicn as we look 
upon the arch of Heaven, without a thought 
that it can decay or fall." — '' Sacred to Ohio," 
I exclaimed on another occasion, " is the Union 
of the States." Did I misrepresent you, my fel 
fow-citizens, wheo I thus declared my own sen 
timents and yours? (Cries of no, no.) If then 
hereafter any propagator of slander shall charge 
me with disunion, I feel that I may safely rely 
on your justice as well as your generosity to re- 
buke the calumniator aud vindicate the truth. 
And now let me say a few words about Abo- 
litionism—that word of terror, by repeating 
which, in every variety of intonation, our oppo- 
nents hope to scare full grown men. 

I shall not undertake to define abolitionism, 
or to describe an abolitionist. But I will tell 
you frankly what my position is now, and- ever 
has been, in relation to slavery. 

It is that of Washington, Jefferson and Frank- 
lin ; it is that of the founders of the Republic. 
The great men who framed our Constitution, 
conferred on Congress no power to institute 
or maintain slavery by national legislation ; nor 
did they confer on Congress any power to in- 
terfere by national legislation with slavery in 
the States. 

At the time of the promulgation of the Con- 
stitution, slavery was allowed in most of the 
States by State Constitutions, and regulated by 
State Laws — but there was not a foot of Na- 
tional territory in which a slave could be held, 
unless in violation of positive law. At that 
time there was no national territory except that 
Northwest of the Ohio, and in that territory, 
by the Jefferson proviso, incorporated into the 
Ordinance of 1787, aud by the unanimous con- 
sent of all the States in the Congress of the 
Confederation, slavery had been forever pro- 
hibited. Our National Government, therefore, 
went into operation upon the principle of No 
Slavery Outsiuk of Slave States— upon the 
principle that Slavery is local, not National. 
At that time, also, there were seven free 
States in the Union — not, it is true, of States 
in which slavery had been absolutely abolished, 
but of States in which the ultimate extinction 
of slavery was certain, and the State policy was 
on the side of Freedom. The number of slave 
States was only six, and in some of them it was 
confidently expected that provision would soon 
be made by law for the eradication of slavery. 
Then there was a majority of free States in 



the Union at the outset of the national career, 
and the Ordinance of 1787 made provision for 
the permanence of the majority by declaring 
that not less than three nor more than fiv(! States 
should be created out of the territory in which 
by its own action Slavery was forever prohibit- 
ed. 

Thus fellow-citizens, our National Govern- 
ment may be fairly said to be based on three 
great principles in respect to Slavery — non- 
interference by the National Government with 
Slavery within slave States — non-extension of 
Slavery beyond the limits of the slave States — 
a perpetual majority of free States in the Union. 
Our actual history demonstrates the fact, 
that only one of these three principles has been 
practically applied. Tlie national government 
has never interfered with Slavery iu tbe slave 
States, but, slavery has been extended far be- 
yond State limits; aud the slaveholders have 
ini-isted, and during much the greater part of our 
historical period, have actually been allowed 
to have as many slave States as there have been 
free States in the Union. 

The original policy of the fathers of the Re- 
rpublic has been subverted. We simply de- 
mand its restoration. We "want indemnity for 
the past and security for the future." (Cheers.) 
Neither I nor.any other Republican, so tar as I 
know, proposes any inteiference with slavery in 
any State. What we demand is, that slavery 
shall not be extended or permitted in any terri- 
tory outside of slave Slates. None among us 
would change any constitutional right or priv- 
ilege now belonging to a State allowing slavery 
within its limits; but we insist that no such 
right or privilege shall be abused to the subver- 
sion of liberty in free States. Ohio Freedom 
will not interfere with Kentucky Slavery- 
Kentucky Slavery must ?wt interfere with Ohio 
Freedom. (Earnest applause.) 

If this be abolitionism, then Washington, 
Jefferson, Henry, Madison, Adams, Franklin, 
and a great host of patriots, of names only kss 
conspicuous than these, were abolitionists. All 
these illustrious men hated slavery. Most of 
them have left on record to be transmitted from 
generation to generation, their stern condemna- 
tion of the system. All of them longed for the 
coming time in which the whole land should be 
delivered by the constitutional action of the Na- 
tional and State Government, from this its 
greatest curse. Where they stood, I stand.— 
What they felt, I feel. What they labored to 
accomplish, I labor— but oh ! with what dispro- 
portionate energy and ability, to accomplish. 
In the methods and by the rules also which they 
observed, I aim to act— not seeking or expecting 
to interfere by national legislation, or by the 
legislation of any free State, with the mternal 
aUairs of any slave Slate ; but firmly resolved 
to "to resist the spread of slavery," to "oppose 
its existence in any national territory," aud to 
oppose also "the further increase of slave terri- 
tory or slave States in this Republican confed- 
eracy." . 

If this be abolitionism, who of you is not abo- 
litionist? But we well know that the charge of 
abolitionism is always intended to convey more 
than this. It is always designed to impute a 



rash, headlong znal to get rid of slavery, by 
whatever meaas, fair or unfair, without regard 
to the constitution, without respect to the rights 
of the States, and in contempt of our obligations 
to the Union. In this sense, 1 certainly am 
not, and I think that none of you, my fellow- 
citizens, are abolitionists. When therefore, you 
hear such a charge made against me herealter, 
treat it, I beseech you, with the contempt it 
merits. 

Fellow-citizens, I have endeavored to state to 
you with clearness and precision, the princi- 
ples and policy of the Republican party on the 
great and prominent question of slavery. What, 
on the other hand, are the principles and policy 
of our opponents? — of the supporters of the 
existing State and National Administrations ? 
They claim to be the Democracy — but their De- 
mocracy is like the play of Hamlet with the 
part of Hamlet omitted. It is the thing in 
name only — nothing more. They go no longer 
up to the Jerusalem of the true worship, but 
have made for themselves calves at Bethel and 
Dan. They have abandoned the creed taught 
by Jefferson, the great apostle of the Democratic 
faith, and have hitched themselves to the teach- 
ings of the new political saints, St. Stephen and 
St. Franklin. With these new leaders, instead 
of battling for equal rights and exact justice 
for all men, they boldly march upon a crusade 
against Freedom. 

Is not this true? Let history answer. In 
1848 the democratic party in Ohio assumed a 
bold and decided anti-slavery position. Here 
is their resolution, adopted in State Conven- 
tion on the 8th of January of that year: 

^•Resolved, That the people of Ohio, now as 
they have always done, look upon the institu- 
tion of Slavery in any part of the Union, as an 
evi4, and unfavorable to the lull development 
of the spirit and practical benefits of our free 
institi^tions; and that, entertaining these senti- 
ments, they will at all times feel it to be their 
duty to use all power clearly given by the 
terms of the National compact, to prevent its 
increase, to mitigate, and finally to eradicate 
the evil." 

This was the year in which Gen. Taylor was 
elected. The incoming of a whig administra- 
tion left the democracy free from temptation to 
bow down to the slave power, and for a time 
they maintained their anti-slavery position with 
apparent courage and decision. When the com- 
promise nieasures of 1850, abrogated the Mexi- 
can prohibition of slavery in New Mexico and 
Utah, and placed the Fugitive Slave act on the 
Statute Book, democratic presses took strong 
ground against them. Governor Wood, in his 
message, declared for the repeal of the fugitive 
slave act and for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia. At this time, the demo- 
cratic party, having no pro-slavery national 
administration with immense revenues and 
thousands of offices at its disposal to check or 
thwart the natural action of democratic princi- 
ples, seemed resolved to throw off the domina- 
tion of the slave power, and to restore the Jeffer- 
Fonian policy of restriction and denationaliza- 
tion in respect to slavery. It now seemed to 
•ue and to many other democrats who had stood 
o 



aloof from the democratic organization on u 
count of its pro-slavery action, that we ought to 
waive our separate organization, and unite in 
endeavoring to uphold the Ohio democratic 
platform and the liberal anti-slavery policy 
which the party proposed to adopt. In con- 
formity with this view I acted, and in a letter 
which was printed with approbation in nearly 
every democratic paper in the State, gave my 
reasons for my action. At the same time, in the 
same letter, 1 distinctly declared that should 
"sinister influences hereafter prevail with any 
future democratic convention to set up another 
slave platform, either State or National, either 
by resolutions or nominations," I, for one, should 
resume my independent position, and refuse 
support to platforms and candidates of princi- 
ples antagonizing "those now proclaimed by the 
Ohio democracy." 

This was in 1851. In 1852 the National Dem- 
ocratic Convention assembled at Baltimore, and 
did set up a national platform utterly irrecon- 
cilable with that of the Ohio democracy, and 
nominated a candidate for the Presidency whose 
boast was that no" act of his life was inconsistent 
with the national platform. The candidate was 
Franklin Pierce. The platform on slavery was 
contained in these three resolutions: 

"Resolved, That Congress has no power un- 
der the Constitution to interfere with or control 
the domestic institutions of the several States, 
and that such States are free to be and proper 
judges of their own affairs, where not prohibit- 
ed by the Constitution; that all efforts of the 
Abolitionists or others to induce Congress to 
interfere with questions of slavery, or to take 
incipient steps in relation thereto, are calcula- 
ted to lead to the most alarming and dangerous 
consequences, and that all such efforts have an 
inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness 
of the people and endanger the stability of the 
Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any 
friend of our political institutions. 

Resolved, That the foregoing proposition cov- 
ers and was intended to embrace the whole sub- 
ject of slavery agitation in Congress ; and 
therefore the Democratic party of the Union, 
standing on this National platform, will abide 
by and adhere to the faithful execution of all 
the acts known as the Compromise Measures, 
settled by the last Congress, the act for the re- 
claiming of fugitives from service or labor in- 
cluded, which act being designed to carry out 
an express provision of the Constitution, cannot 
with fidelity thereto be repealed, or so changed 
as to destroy or impair its efSciency. 

''Resolved, That the Democratic party will 
resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or 
out of it, the agitation of the slavery question, 
under whatever shape or color the attempt may 
be made." 

I was present at the Convention, not as a del- 
egate, but as a deeply inteiested spectator, 
when these things were done. 

Not a moment did I hesitate as to the course 
which fidelity to true democratic principles re- 
quired of me. I repudiated at once both the 
platform and the candidate. My opponent in 
the present canvass, Col. Medill, was also pres- 
ent in this Baltimore Convention. He was a 



10 



delegate. He did not vote against the platform, 
and he did support the candidate. 

Many earnest democrats, also, reluctant to 
give up th ir party organization, and hoping 
on against hope that the Democracy of Oiiio 
would remain on the whole, true to their own 
platform and to freedom, notwithstanding the 
inconsistency of supporting a Presidential candi- 
date of opposite principles, adhered to the or- 
ganization and supported the nominee. 

The Baltimore nominee was elected, and then 
the patronage of the National Government was 
employed to induce the Ohio Democracy to en- 
dorse the Baltimore Pro slavery Platform. In 

1853, at the first State Convention of the new 
administration, an attempt was made to add the 
Baltimore to the State Platform, but was un- 
successful. At the next State Convention, in 

1854, the attempt was renewed and was success- 
ful. Hire is the Resolution by which the Ohio 
Democracy bound itself to the banner of the 
Slave power: 

'^Resolved, That the Democrats of Ohio, in 
Convention assembled, hereby recognize and 
adopt as our creed, the Baltimore platform of 
1852, adopted by the Convention which nomi- 
nated Franklin Pierce for President of the Uni- 
ted States." 

This resolution was adopted after the intro- 
ductian of the Nebraska bill, with clauses re- 
pealing the Missouri Prohibition, into the Sen- 
ate of the United States, by Stephen A. Doug- 
las, and was a fitting prelude to the election 
of a Nebraska Senator by the Legislature then 
in session. 

Hitherto, since the adoption of the liberal 
resolution of 1848, the Ohio Democracy had tri- 
umphed at every election. In the fall of 1848, 
indeed, its success was only partial — in the sub- 
sequent year, however, it was complete. The 
indorsement of the pro-slavery resolutions of 
Baltimore, and the indorsement given to the 
Kansas-Nebraska bill by the election of a Ne- 
braska Senator, heralded its most disastrous 
discomfiture. The people, o,utraged beyond 
measure by the repeal of the Missouri prohibi- 
tion, and alarmed by the dangers to freedom 
everywhere, from the aggressions of the slave 
power, rallied in overwhelming numbers, with 
a generous oblivion of past party differences, 
and overthrew the Administration party. Eve- 
ry member of Congress who had voted for the 
Nebraska bill was rejected by his constituents. 
Several who bad voted against the bill were 
also rejected because they adhered to the Ad- 
ministration under whose auspices these outra- 
ges against freedom had been perpetrated. An 
unbroken delegation of twenty-one members, 
pledged against the iniquity, was sent to the 
next Congress to utter the voice and execute 
the will of our great State. 

Notwithstanding all this, the Administration 
party, at its State Convention in January last, 
as if in reckless contempt of the peojjle, re- 
newed its aflirmation of the Baltimore Platform 
in these words: 

"Rfsolved, That this Convention, in behalf of 
the Democracy of Ohio, here))y affirm the plat- 
form of resolutions adopted at the National 
Democratic Convention, which assembled in 



Baltimore in June, 1852, as a clear and distinct 
declaration of our political principles." 

Not content with hopiua: apparently nothing 
from the people, and determined to <!u whatev- 
er was possible to conciliate the slavery propa- 
ganda at Washington, in order to secure tor its 
members and their friends the favors ol the 
Administration, the Conveui ion adopted another 
resolution, which I will read : 

"Resolved, That, we recognize in the Demo- 
cratic Administration, State and National, fear- 
less, consistent imd patriotic auxiliaries in the 
above and kindred measures of Democratic pol- 
icy, and therefore worthy of the support and 
confidence of every Democrat." 

More than this. To leave no doubt as to the 
fullness of its acquiescence in the schemes of the 
propagandists of slavery, the Convention adopt- 
ed this resolution also : 

" Resolved, That we demand from the Demo- 
cr tic majority in Congress : 

4. The acquisition and annexation to the 
Union of Cuba and^he Sandwich Islands at the 
earliest moment consistent with our national 
honor, and the securing of a passage across the 
Isthmus for our commerce in peace and our ar- 
mies in war." 

The same resolution included ottier demands 
upon the democratic maj(nity in Congress, 
which the<vOnveutiou declared to be of "imme- 
diate and urgent " importance ; but none of 
which obtained the least notice from that demo- 
cratic majority. 

As if in order to prove the uttermost of its 
contempt upon the old anti Slavery resolutions, 
and to demonstrate the hollowness of all its pro- 
fessions in favor of real progress and real re- 
form, the Convention suffered the old anti- 
slavery resolutions to i'ppear in the new pro- 
slavery platform, crucified between the resolu- 
tion endorsing the Baltimore platform and that 
endorsing the Administration of Mr. Pierce. 

The demand for the acquisition of Cuba and 
the Sandwich Islands of course found favor with 
the administration, which was ready enough to 
create a National debt to the amount of two 
hundred millions ot dollars to strengthen the 
Slave Interest, and burden all other interests by 
the purchase of Cuba, and ready enough also to 
convert the Sandwich Islands, redeemed from 
heathenism by the self-denying labors oi Chris- 
tian Missionaries, into marts lor Slaves. Hap- 
pily, the schemes ot the Administration lor the 
extention of slavery in these directions, have 
thus far proved unsuccessful, notwithstanding 
the countenance and encouragement of this res- 
olution of the Administration Convention in 
Ohio. 

It was quite natural that this Convention 
should nominate for reelection all the members 
of the State Administration which it indorsed 
in the second iji'solution I have just quoted, as a 
"fearless, i)atriotie and consistent auxiliary" in 
the " measures of Democratic policy" set forth 
in the Baltimore platform, as well as in this new 
State platform. 

It is thus clear, beyond all question, that the 
Administration Ticket now presented to the 
People represents the extreme pro-slavery pol- 
icy of the existing Administration ; and that to 



11 



vote for this ticket is to give a direct and po- 
tential sanction to tljat policy. 

I have already glanced at some of the features 
of that policy. Permit me now to remind you 
of them. 

lu 1820 Missouri applied for admission into 
the Union as a slave State. Her apolicatiou 
was strenuously and persisteutly opposed. A 
vast majoriiy of the people of the b^ree States 
were against it. At length, however, by the 
nearly unanimous votes of the ilave States, and 
a few votes from the Free States, a Compromise 
was forced through Congress. Its conditions 
were that Missouri should cot^e in as a slave 
State, and that the territory north ot 3G deg. 
30 min. should be forever dedicated to freedom. 
This Compromise in the prints of the day was 
styled a compact, and was regarded as such, 
when finally acquiesced in, by the people at 
large. Not long after it was made, the slave 
interest claimed that the compact embraced a 
third stipulation not expressed in its terras ; 
namely, that the territory South of 3f) dcg. 30 
min. should be created into slave States. This 
claim was conceded by the free States for the 
sake of peace. Then Arkansas came into the 
Union as a slave State, and, under the alleged 
equity of the compact, Florida and Texas came 
ill as slave States. The residue of the territory 
South of 30 deg. 30 min. was partitioned among 
several slaveholding Indian tribes. Thus the 
slave interest had taken every loot South of the 
line for slavery, claiming all the while under 
the compact. Iowa, north of the line, had been 
admitted as a free State, and Minnesota had 
beeu created as a free territory. So far the 
compact had been fulfilled. The slave interest 
had realized all it was entitled to under it, and 
now the lime had come for the organization of 
a territorial government for the vast residue of 
the country north of the line, large enough to 
make twelve States, equal in size to Ohio. 

Public faith demanded that this territorial 
government should be organized with a prohi- 
bition of slavery. The compact required it. 
' Religion and Humanity demanded it also. 
Slavery is utterly inconsistent with the great 
injuQClion " Whatsoever ye would that others 
should do unto you, do ye even so unto them." 

The principles of Democracy demanded it. 
"All men are created equal, and are endowed 
by their Creator with certaiu inalienable rights, 
among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness." "To protect and defend their rights 
governments are instituted among men." Con- 
gress was to institute a government for the ter- 
ritories. What could he plainer than its duty 
to institute it that it would be incapable of de 
stroying inalienable rights? 

Sound policy required it. Free labor makes 
great and prosperous States. Slave labor blights 
the soil and retards the progress of the commu- 
nities in which it is allowed. 

The interests of commerce and manufactures 
required it. In the territory organized without 
slavery, agriculture would soon extort its treas- 
ures from the earth ; and these would be found 
along all the lines of railroad and through 
every other channel of communication, quick- 
ning industry iu all its forms everywhere. As 



the settlements should multiply, ranges of States 
stretching westward from Missouri and Iowa to 
the borders of California would come into ex- 
istence. In these States railroad systems would 
spring into being. Missouri, a slave State, 
with an immense grant of land from Congress, 
has, as yet, been able to do next to nothing in 
pushing her railroads west from the Mississippi. 
Iowa, younger, with far less of natural resour- 
ces, and without any aid whatever from Con- 
gress, is fast pushing to completion two lines 
of iron way from the Mississippi to the Missou- 
ri. If the territorial governments of Kansas 
and Nebraska should be organized under the 
compact, the States to be afterwards created 
would come in as free States, and not a railroad 
only, but railroads, to the Pacific, would be 
built by the irresistible energies of free labor, 
even though Congress might never contribute a 
dollar in aid. 

Such, fellow-citizens, were some of the weighty 
considerations which demanded that the com- 
pact which prohibited slavery should be faith- 
fully observed in the organization of territorial 
governments for the vast Northwest. 

But the slave power willed otherwise, and 
we had, and yet tave, a National Administra- 
tion entirely subservient to its will. Stephen A. 
Douglas, placed by the Administration party at 
the head of the committee of Territories, devo- 
ted himself to the task of effecting the repeal of 
that prohibition which, itself guarded by the 
affections of the people, had protected through 
thirty-four years the inheritance of Free Labor 
against the approaches of slavery. His bad 
zeal was seconded by the whole power of the 
Administration. Every appliance was put in 
requisition to seduce or intimidate Senators and 
Representatives to di.sregard the wishes of their 
constituents and vote for the repeal. The con- 
test was protracted. In the Senate, every inch 
of ground was disputed. You know the part I 
took, and the courage and constancy with which 
my colleague and other Senators resisted the 
outrage. In the House, the struggle was equal- 
ly earnest. The gentleman who now sits near 
me [Mr. Campbell] always at his post and 
ever ready in resources, was among the foremost 
in that band of gallant spirits, who day after day 
and night after night, struggled against the 
wrong. At length, however, over violate(i rules 
and outraged rights, the slave power and its 
allies forced their way to nefarious victory. 
The compact was broken. The barrier of free- 
dom was broken down. The angel of prohibi- 
tion, who through so many years had guarded 
with flaming sword turning every way the en- 
trance to the tree of life placed in the midst of 
that Eden, was sacreligiously driven away; — • 
and Death, the Death of Slavery, entered in. 

Never — never can I forget with what feelings 
I witnessed the final passage of the Repeal Bill 
in the Senate, nor with what feelings when the 
great Wrong had been consummated. Midnight, 
tit hour ot darkness for a deed so dark, I, with 
some brother Senators, descended the western 
steps of the capitol towards our temporary 
homes. A great sorrow filled my heart, but 
even that was far less bitter than the doubt and 
apprehension which would seize upon me lest, 



12 



after all, you, the people, should acquiesce even 
in this last outrage, and thus surrender the coun- 
try, finally and forever, to the power which had 
inflicted it. As I meditated on these things, the 
thunder of a cannon which had been planted 
north of the capitol by triumphant confederates 
against Freedom, echoed and re-echoed over the 
silent city, proclaiming the victory of Slavery 
over Freedom. 

But, thank God! the smoking thunder of that 
night awoke the people. From our Northern 
Maine — up the Allegheny crags, and over their 
summits — across our broad prairies, and over 
mighty rivers — till it reverberated from the 
Rocky Mountains, and filled the ears of young 
but gigantic Iowa— that mocking thunder pealed, 
everywhere summoning the people to the re- 
dress of the great wrong. Everywhere the peo- 
ple obeyed the summons. 

la our own noble State, with a unanimity and 
stern decision worthy of the first-born of the 
ordinance of Freedom, you rejected the servants 
who had betrayed you in Congress — rejected 
even men who had voted against the wrong, but 
still purposed to adhere to the Administration, 
and sent twenty-one Representatives to execute, 
in the Legislature of the Nation, the will of the 
people of Ohio. 

Such, fellow citizens, was the occasion, and 
such the result of the Union of the Freemen of 
Ohio for the sake of Freedom last fall. 

The simple questions for our present decision 
are— Shall this union be continued, or shall it 
be brokeu up ? Shall the twenty-one members 
elected last fall to Congress, be sustained by 
your judgment this fall, or sh.\ll they be allow- 
ed to take their seats next winter with the dis- 
heartening consciousness that you do not prove 
by works the abiding nature of the faith which 
you then professed ? 

If there was reason for the union last fall, is 
there not ten-told greater reason now ? Then, 
the only consummated wrong was that of the 
Repeal. Slavery had not actually entered Kan- 
zas. Every where it was asserted by the parti- 
sans of the administration, that Slavery never 
would find admiss'on into the Territory. 

Now, it is actually there. The great crime 
of planting the curse of Slavery upon the soil 
consecrated by compact as free homes for free 
men, is a fact accomplished. And by what 
shameful means! Many of our young men 
went to the Territory, trusting to the declara- 
tion of the supporters oi the administration, 
that the people of the Territory would be left 
to settle the (question for themselves. They 
went, not with arms for murderous conflict, but 
with arms for the conquest of nature. They 
took with them the plough and the hoe, the plain 
and the adze — the implements of agriculruie 
and the mechanic arts. They took with them 
the Spelling- Book and the Bible — intending to 
establish th(( institutions of the Territory upon 
the basis of ieiirning, morality an<l religion. 

In March la^t. thi^y a~t<eml)led at the polls lor 
the purpose of electing the nienibers ol Iheir Htm 
Legihiaiure. But who m' t them there? Kitt- 
lian bands of Missourians, armed with bowie 
knives and rc^volvers, under the lead of Atchi- 
son and Btringfellow, marched iuto the terri- 



tory, seized upon the polls, and fraudulently 
deposited their Missouri ballots a;^ Kanzas bal- 
lots, and elected Missourians as Kanzas"men, to 
be members of the Legislature. It was but a 
few days ago that I saw in a nevvspap. r a letter 
from a traveler in Western Missouri, who called 
at a farmer's house, and found him actually 
mounting his horse to ride iuto Kanzas, where 
he was to take his seat as member elect of the 
Kanzas Legislature. 

When and where, in the history of the world, 
was such atrocious outrage as this perpetrated 
or endured ? 

The whole action of this Legislature has been 
a prolonged crime. Its enactments for the es- 
tablishment of slavery, rival in atrocity the 
worst edicts of Caligula or Nero. The red code 
of Draco whitens in comparison with the Missouri 
code of Kanzas. That terrible code was said 
to be written in blood, but the puriisliraents it 
inflicted were inflicted for crimes: the Missouri- 
Kansas code denounces death for acts of mercy, 
humanity and religion. 

When the law itself is iniquity, what but vi- 
olence and outrage is to be expected from its 
authors and approvers? At this moment one 
young man from Ohio lies in prison, charged 
with murder, for having defended himself to 
the last extremity against an unprovoked as- 
sault of these confederates in crime ; and it 
was but the other day that another citizen of 
our state, who was lately described to me by 
his neighbors of Ashland county as a Chris- 
tian Minister of the Disciples Church, irre- 
proachable in character and of a mild and for- 
bearing spirit, charged only with avowing him- 
self in favor of making Kansas a free state, and 
with refusing to sign a declaration in favor of 
Slavery, was seized b- a mob of ruffians led 
by one Kelly, and dragged to the river's brink, 
where his face was painted black, and marked 
with the letter R, and then, upon two pine logs 
lashed together, this Minister of Christ was 
pushed out into the turbid waters of the Mis- 
souri, to live or die, as the event might deter- 
mine. But why speak further of these things ? 
Who has forgotten the assault by this Missouri 
mob on the Quarterly Conference of the Meth- 
odist Church in Platte County — the seizure of 
the minister whiU; preaching, amid shouts of 
"Hang him! Shoot him !" — the escape of the 
other ministers amidst threats of tar, feathers 
and hemp, from the mob, amply provided with 
tliese things ? 

If there be any manhood left in us — if we 
are not utterly bereft of understanding — if any 
love of justice, if any touch of pity, if any 
sense of right yet dwells in our hearts — can we 
fail to see and feel that if there was cause 
why wo should unite last fall to stay the deso- 
laring march of slavery aggression, there is, at 
this liour, tenfold greater occasion for such 
union ? 

But we ai'e often told that the administration 
and its supporters are not responsible for these 
infamous iiansactions. Not responsible I Is 
not the f're.-ideiit charged with the duty of ex- 
ecuting the laws of the United StatisV Is not 
Franklin Fierce President V When has heat- 
tempted to enforce these laws in Kansas ? If 



13 



Anthony Burns follows the North Star from 
his house of bondage in Virginia, to Bunker 
Hill in Massachusetts, the army and navy are 
put ill requisition, the City Military is ordered 
out, ti:e telegraph wires tremble under the mes- 
sages they bear from Washington to Boston, 
and from Boston to Washington. The whole 
energy of the. Government is exerted to force 
the poor fugitive slave back to bondage. When 
Kansas was invaded, the United States troops 
were idle at Fort Leavenworth : not a soldier 
was employed to protect the settlers. Not even 
a proclamation was issued in condemnation of 
the outrages : not even a smile of Presidential 
favor or a crumb of executive patronage was 
withdrawn from the iusligators and leaders. — 
At the instance of the sham Legislature of Kan- 
sas, backed by Atchison, Striiigfellow aud Jef- 
ferson Davis, Reeder was removed from office. 
Stringfellow and Kelly were rewarded for the 
incendiary articles with which their paper, the 
Squatter Sovereign, were crowded, with the 
printing of the Laws of Congress, and other 
governmental patronage. Kelly, one of the ed- 
itors, was made Postmaster. And finally Wil- 
son Shannon, one of the Ohio Members who 
voted for the iniquity, and for that treason to 
his constituents was rejected by the People, 
was appointed Governor, to recognize the ille- 
gal and fraudulent assemblage which undertook 
to legislate for Kansas, as the actual lej/isla- 
ture, and its acts as valid laws. 

If these facts do not prove the complicity of 
the Administration in the Kansas outrages, it 
is impossible to establish any proposition by 
evidence. 

And now, my friends, what will you do ? 
Hold on to the party and let the tide of aggres- 
sion roll on ? Or will you, with the noble in- 
dignation of men, whose principles have been 
betrayed, whose rights invaded, whose liber- 
ties endangered, rally to the rescue of freedom? 
We make no war on the Constitution. Let 
every section of the country have the lull ben- 
efit of all its provisions. But let it not be wrest- 
ed from its original intention to the sanction of 
injustice and crime. Let it be construed and 
administered rather, in the light of its own 
great purposes, the establisment of justice and 
the security of freedom. 

We make no war on our brethren of the Slave 
States. We would deal justly and generously 
with them in every respect, even as we would 
wish them to deal with us. We do not seek to 
impose our Liberty upon them : let them not 
seek to impose their Slavery on us, or to in- 
volve us in Its support. This is the plain path 
of duty for both sides, atd it is also the path of 
peace. 

There are thousands in the Slave States who 
abh.ir that violation of plighted faith through 
which the Missouri Prohibition was abrogated. 
But they need the support of the United Free 
States. A distinguished Southern gentleman 
once said to me " Your Northern People never 
sustain iheir own meu who faithfully represent 
their principles. The only crown with which 
..fidelity to Northern Principles has been reward- 
ed is the crown of Martyrdom. How theU can 
you expect Southern men to resist such a meas- 



ure as this Nebraska Bill, unjust and danger- 
ous as it is, when proposed by a Northern Sen- 
ator and sustained by a Northern President?' 
Let the Free States ouly be true to themselves, 
sustaining persistenlly their faithlul represen- 
tatives, and there will be no lack of just and 
generous Southern men to stand with them. 

But more than this. There are thousands 
also ill the Slave States Who abhor slavery 
itself. Let the people of the Free States cease 
from the extension of slavery: — let them with- 
draw from it the support of National Legisla- 
tion — let them place the fair and legitimate in- 
fluence of the National Government on the side 
of Freedom — and then thousands will take up 
the work of emancipation at home, in their 
respective States, and the glorious result of 
Freedom for all will be reached at no very dis- 
tant period, in modes entirely consistent with 
the safety of all, the prosperity of all, and the 
constitutional rights of all. 

Permit me now, my fellow citizens, to direct 
your attention to some other matttrs. of mo- 
mentous interest to you, involved deeply in 
the pending political contest. I rtfer to the 
State Reforms which the Convention of the 13th 
of July proposed in their Platform ; and to 
certain National Reforms of a kindred charac- 
ter. 

The Platform of the 13th July demands re- 
trenchment in public expenditures; athorough- 
ly economical State administration ; a just and 
equal basis of taxation, aud the election of mem- 
bers of the Legislature by single Districts. 

Other reforms are doubtless needed : but the 
Convention deemed it best and wi-est to refer 
all other matters to the people of the counties, 
who, in the election of members of the Legisla- 
ture will execute their own wishes, and to the 
Legislature itself, whose members, comparing 
opinions with a sincere desire to meet the wants 
aud promote the welfare of all classes in the 
State, will be able to mature and enact such 
laws as will p;uard the rights and secure the 
prosperity of all the great interests of the State, 
Commercial, Manufacturing, Mechauical and 
Agricultural. In respect to these matters I 
have only to say, should I be chosen to fill the 
office for which I have been nomiuated, that 
whatever just and proper influence belongs to it 
would be exerted in harmony with the will of 
the representatives of the people. 

Of the Reforms proposed by the Convention 
I wish to speak more fully. And, first, of the 
equalization of political power by the Single 
District system. Hamilton county, under the 
present system, elects eight Rei)resentatives aud 
three Senators. ISo other county, except Cuy- 
ahoga for this year ouly, elects more thau two 
Represeatatives ; aud no other single couuly 
elects a Senator except Cuyahoga. This sys- 
tem, then, gives to whatever party may happen 
to control Hamilton a vastly disproportioned 
power. In most other counties each elector 
votes for but one Representative; in Hamilton 
county each elector votes for eight. The eight 
when elected are substantially a unit, aud uni- 
ted, have equal political power iu the Legisla- 
ture with eight counties having each a single 
Representative, and outweigh any number of 



14 



counties so divided that the majority either way 
is less ihau eight. Thus unjust to tlie other 
counlies, this system is injurious to Hamiltoa 
couuty also. It gives occat^ion to combiuations 
auioag candidates by which the true expression 
of the popular will is olleu defeated, and it 
subjects all the various interests of city and 
country to the accidental control of one partic- 
ular i^tere^t, or, pA'haps, of influences hostile to 
all. A Single District System would remedy 
these evils, bringing each Representative into 
the closest possible contact and sympathy with 
his cou-tituenls, and compelling each to depend 
upon his own merits and qualilicalions, rather 
Uian upon mere politic^vl combinations. The 
(A)iivention uf the 13lh, therefoie. thought 
proper to demand an amendment of the Consti- 
tution, establishing the Single District System. 

[ic^form iu taxation and expenditure is also 
urgently demanded. It needs no argument to 
prove that the people are oppressed by taxation, 
livery body feels the fact. Within a few short 
years the burden of taxation has grown from 
something over four millions of dollars, collect- 
ed annually from the people, to over nine mill- 
ions. We will be absolutely exact, and say 
from 84,227.708 to S9, 092. 339. So enormously 
has this burden increased that the people have 
become tenants rather than citizens; liie State 
a landlord rather than a Government; and the 
charge upon industry and property a rent rath- 
er than a tax. Ot course expenditure keeps 
pace witli taxation, and is out of all proportion 
to the outlay in better times. These facts call 
loudly for reform. 

I do not say indeed that any State Adminis- 
tration can relieve the people from taxation. I 
seek to create no illusive expectations. ^V'bat I 
do say is that there is no necessity, in my judg- 
ment, that its burdens should be so enormous, 
or that the public expenditures should be so 
lavish. 

But not only is the amount of taxation ex- 
cessive; but the principles upon which it is levied 
are wrong. The statute permits the deduction 
of debts from credits. In other words it allows 
each individual, in listing his property for tax- 
ation, to (ieduct what lie owes tVom wliat is ow- 
ing to him It taxes each upon what he actu- 
ally ha^, and not upon W'hat he has not. Dut the 
provisions of the statute allowing these deduc- 
tions have been declared' uncon.-titutional by a 
majority of the Judges composing the Supreme 
Court of the State, all of whom are members of 
the Administration party, State and National. 
The State Auditor has accordingly issued his 
instructions to the township Assessors requiring 
that all credits should be listed for taxation, 
without iiny deduction whatever. In some 
counties, I understand, these instructions are 
obeyed and the statute is diriegarded, while in 
other counties the statute is followed and the 
instructions disregnrded. The necessary result 
is confusion, inecpMljty, injustice. One county 
is taxed upon all the credits of the people with- 
out deduction; another county with perhaps an 
ecpial amount of credits, is not taxed at all if 
the dei>ts equal or exceed the credits. 

In my judgment, all this is wrong. The judicial 
construction of the Constitutiou which abrogates 



the statute seems to me erroneous, and the Aud- 
itor's instructions, iu my opinion, are founded ou 
a principle which cannot be vindicated. 

Let me state a case or two, in illustration of 
the operation of the Auditor's rule. A man, 
witiiout properly, borrows a hundred dollars 
and gives his note for it; then lends the same 
hundred dollars and takes a note. Is he any 
richer than before? Has he here acquired any 
property upou which he should be taxed ? Com- 
mon sense answers in the negative; but the 
Auditor's rule says he must be taxed upou a 
hundred dollars. A shoemaker buys a hundred 
dollars worth of leather, and gives his note to 
the leather dealer. He converts the leather in- 
to shoes, which he sells to his neighbors, and 
thus creates small book accounts against a score 
of persons. If he sells to safe customers and 
at fair prices, he will have a little surplus af- 
ter paying the leather dealer; but, if otherwise, 
he may sustain a loss. The Auditor's rule is 
inflexible iu either case, and requires him to 
pay tax upon the whole value of the accounts, 
witiiout any deduction of his outstanding debt, 
although it may take all he can collect from 
them to pay his creditor. A rule which oper- 
ates thus, is manifestly unjust. 

But we are told that it brings a large amount 
of new taxaliles upon the graud levy. That is 
true. A still greater amount might be obtain- 
ed liy altering the principle of the rule a little. 
Just list all the people own, and then add all 
the people do not own, and you will have a very 
respectable amount of property ou the grand 
levy; and if you can make the people pay ta.xe3 
on the whole, you will have a revenue as large 
as the greediest hungerer after public plunder 
could desire. 

Let me illustrate. Let somebody in New- 
York lend me a thousand dollars and take my 
note; let me lend the same sum to my ueighbor 
and take his note ; let the borrower from me 
lend the same sum to another and take his note; 
and thus let the process go ou until the same 
thousand dollars shall have been lent to every 
per.-^on in the State, the first lender being the 
last borrower and taking back his money to 
New-York. There are two millions of people 
in the State, each of whom will then have bor- 
rowed and lent a thousand dollars. The aggre- 
gate amount of notes will be two thousand mil- 
lions of dollars, and these notes will represent 
not property, but debt. Now, according to the 
rule, all these notes will go upon the grand 
levy, and thus we shall have au addition of two 
thou.sand millions of dollars of new taxables, 
and not a cent of additional property in the 
State. The insolvency of the people constitutes, 
according to this rule, the weaKh of the State! 
Now, ta.x those taxables— suppose the tax only 
one per cent.; (we shall have suflirient cause of 
thankfulness if we ever get our taxation down 
to that rate)— and the result will be that each 
person in the State, for the privilege of owning 
a thousand dollars and having a thousand dol- 
lars due to him, or iu other words for the priv- 
iltfge of being worth just nothing at all, must 
pay the sum of ten dollars. The aggregate will 
be twenty millions of dollars— a very pretty 
revenue to be raised by a tax upon nothing. 



15 



Nobody can deny. I think, that this s'lpposi- 
tioufnliy iUii.-trates the practical operatioa of 
the rele 1 know of nothin.2 which is more like 
it than the case of the two Yankees, who were. 
f,.r some ofivuce. condemned to six months im- 
prisonraiMU in the same jail. VVhen they went 
in, one of them had an old jackknife, and the 
other had nothing at all. iVow, Yankees, under 
all circumstances, will trade ; and these Yan- 
kees commenced trading on the jackknife ; and 
so successriil were their operations, that, at the 
end of their term, they came out of jail each 
worth lilly dollars, but with nothing belon-iing 
to either except the same old jackknife. They 
had got rich by trading in debt, just as our 
State'^is to get rich by taxing debt. Taxation 
by the Auditor's rule may well enough be called 
the jackknife theory of taxation. 

Now, the party in power— the administration 
party— which claiins to be the Democratic par- 
ty, but certainly is not a Democratic party— 
boldly challenges your approbation both of the 
amount and the principle of this enormous and 
oppressive taxation, by nominating for i-eelec- 
tion all the members of the State administration 
under whose auspices the present system has 
been imposed upon the people. 

What emboldens the party to do this it is 
hard to tell. Perhaps they will insist that 
those who have proved thetnselves so vigorous, 
skillful and successful in levying taxes on, must 
needs be most competent to take taxes off. I 
have read somewhere, not I think in any ac- 
credited medical work however, that the "sove- 
reignest thing on earth" for the bite of a mad 
dog is a hair of the same dog. Our opponents 
seem to have availed themselves of the sugges- 
tion afforded by this specific; for they recommend 
as the true cure for the evils of a bad adminis- 
tration, the reelection of all its members. They 
improve indeed upon the hint ; for whereas a 
single hair suffices in the case of the bite, they 
generously offer, as a remedy for the bad admin- 
istration, to continue nine of the same or sim- 
ilar officials in power. 

But it is hardly possible that the people will 
feel inclined to take the administration nostrum. 
They want some guarantee, not merely of the 
ability to reform, but of a disposition to do so; 
and they see no evidence of such a disposition 
in any action of the party in power. 

Nor are they satisfied with the excuses offered 
by the administration apologists for the vast 
increase of taxation. These apologists indeed 
say that a large proportion of the nine millions 
of taxes is imposed for county and township 
purposes. This is admitted; but the question 
recurs, who made the laws under which all the 
taxes were levied? And the answer puts the 
whole responsibility in the right place. That 
answer is: The party which now endeavors to 
fasten the existing State administration upon 
the people for another term. 

It cannot be denied, fellow citizens, that the 
State officials now in nomination for reelection, 
and the party which supports them, are respon- 
sible for our present grievous taxation, and for 
the oppressive and unjust principle upon which 
it is levied. 

We want a reform. If it can be efiPected 



without an amendment of the Constitution, well 
and good — if not, we want an amendment which 
will effect it. 

But it is not only in State matters that we 
want reform. We demand it also in the action 
of the National Administration. Our national 
taxation has swidled to an enormous sum. More 
than seventy millions of dollars are every year 
collected by the Government from the people in 
the form of duties. Of this vast revenue, the 
people of Ohio pay at least one-tenth. Seven 
millions of dollars a year, at least, are paid 
into the coffers of the Federal Government by 
the citizens of this State. 

Now there is no necessity whatever for this 
enormous taxation. The legitimate operations 
of the Government — all of them — can be carried 
on at less than half this cost. The necessary 
effect of an overflowing treasury is extravagance 
and corruption. Hence steam mail jobs costing 
millions; and hence vast grants of lands to rail- 
roads in some States, while similar grants 
are denied to other States equally entitled, but 
not so much in favor with the ruling power. 
Hence, too, extravagant appropriations for army 
and navy, out of all proportion to the benefits 
derived from either; and hence such measures 
as the assumption of the Texas State debt, and 
the payment of Ten Millions of dollars to Santa 
Anna for a Texan railroad route to the Pacific. 
Hence, too, the armies of Federal officials 
swarming over the land like the locusts ol 
Egypt, and the tendency, so painfully visible 
every where, to exalt the Federal and depress 
the State Governments. 

This is the direct road to consolidation — and 
the road to consolidation is, for us, the road to 
ruin. The old theory of our fathers is the true 
theory. Let us have a poor Government and a 
rich people — lifht taxes and abundant individual 
enterprise— economical expenditure and steady 
prosperity — a General Government strictly 
limited to its sphere, and State Governments re- 
spected and honored, because competent and 
ready to protect the rights and guard the inter- 
ests of the ptople. 

There is another point of view from which we 
of the West should heedfully consider this sub- 
ject of National expenditure. I have already said 
that the people of Ohio pay into the National 
Treasury more than seven millions of dollars a 
year. What do we get back ? Not the salaries 
of the postmasters — these are paid out of the 
postages; not the compensation of Marshals and 
Clerks of the Federal Courts— they are paid 
out of the fees of their offices. What then? Why, 
the salaries of two District Judges, and a few 
appropriations for public buildings. When we 
ask for a small portion of the vast sum which 
we pay for the improvement of our Rivers and 
Harbors, in order that the products of our agri- 
culture and manufactures may find safe and 
cheap access to market, it is denied to us. It 
was but a little more than a year ago that a 
bill making appropriation for our Ohio river 
and our Erie Harbors, passed both Houses; but 
it encountered the veto of the President, or 
rather of that slave power whose4ustrument the 
President is. At the same session a bill for Cape 
Fear river in North Carolina received the Pree- 



ideot's signature. At the last session, a bill 
was passed to remove obstructions to the navi- 
gation of the Savannah river in Georgia, ana it 
was sigaed. Another bill was passed to remove 
the obstructions to the navigation of the St. Clair 
Flats, above Detroit, and it was not signed. It 
was not vetoed. If it had Ijeen, it would prob- 
ably have been passed, notwithstanding the ve- 
to, i)y a two- thirds vote; and, therefore, to malce 
.the denial of the appropriation certain, and to put 
it in tbe most olfensive form, the President put 
the bill in his pocliet and never returned it to 
Congress at all. 

It is in view of all those things, fellow citi- 
zens, that we unite lor Freedom and R-^form. 
Our oppoaeiils call us Fusionists. Well, there 
is no harm in that name. We stand together; 
Whigs, to whom the Whig principles of 1776 are 
dear; Democrats, who believe in the deraoracy 
of Jefferson, and do not believe in the democ- 
racy of Pierce and Davis; Americans, who re- 
gard Freedom and not Slavery as the corner 
stone of American Institutions — we stand to- 
gether to resist the spread of Slavery; to res- 
(iue our national territories from the grasp of 
the slave power; to relorm our State adminis- 
tration; to reduce the mountainous taxation 
under which all interests labor; to deliver our 
country from the affliction of the Fierce admin- 
istration; to punish the authors of the Nebraska 
iniquity; and to vindicate for the West and its 
great interests, their just claims upon the Na- 
tional Government. For these objects we unite 
and are proud of our union. Arrayed under the 
banner of Freedom and Reform, with honest and 
patriotic purposes, we are confident of triumph. 
Assured that our cause is just, we conMe it 
cheerfully to the support of the people. 

There was a time, I confess, when I greatly 
doubted of the future. The American Party 
sprang suddenly into being. Old organizations 
disappeared before its triumphant march. In 
the Free States, it took the side of freedom; and 
the election of an entire anti-Nebraska delega- 
tion in Ohio, and the return of such men as 
Wilson and Hale to the Seuate of the United 
States, attested the reality of its sympathies. 
la the Slave States, on the other baud, it as- 
sumed the championship of slavery and of sla- 
very e.xtension. For one I greatly feared, and 
I know my apprehensions were shared by many 
eulightened and patriotic members of the organ- 
ization, that when its representatives from Slave 
States and Free States should meet in National 
Conventii^i, the Slave State members would 
succeed as they have heretofore succeeded in 
similar Conveulioua of other political parties, 
in securing the adoption of a pro .slavery plat- 
form, and the nomination of pro-slavery candi- 
dates, and that the Free State members would 
acquiesce. This fear of mine — these apprehen- 
sions of others were realized in part. An Amer- 
ican National Convention, as we all know, did 
assemble in Philadelphia. The Slave State 
members did succeed in securing the adoption 
of a pro-slavery platform. But — and 1 de- 
voutly thank God for it — the Free State mem- 
bers nin NOT, ACCiUiKscK. The l)old and true- 
hearted geutluman — whose name is -associated 
with mine upon our Statu ticket, and who will 



soon speak for himself to you — [cheers]— led 
the van of freedom in denouncing the platforio 
and called upon his associates from the Free 
States to rally to the rescue of Freedom. 
[Cheers.] From that hour hope revived. The 
action of the intrepid Ford and his fearless asso- 
ciates demonstrated the existence of a quality, 
supposed to have become nearly extinct in Nor- 
thern men— I mean back bone. [Loud ap- 
plause.] And when ray friend and his fellow 
delegates came home to Oliio and declared their 
concurrence in the purpose already avov.ed by 
the Cleveland State Council — to unite in open 
Convention with all who were willing to unite 
with them for Freedom and Reform, I felt that 
there was but one course for me and those 
who felt as I did, the paramount importance of 
these objects, to meet this generous and patri- 
otic movement half way, and, laying aside every 
jealousy and every prejudice, go into the Con- 
vention frankly and sincerely, and honestly 
abide its result. We did so, and the result is 
before the people in the platform and ticket of 
the 13th ol July. 

For myself I owe no allegiance to any other 
than the Republican organization. I am not a 
member of any other. I proscribe no man. The 
rights of all my fellow-citizens, native or na- 
turalized, are as dear to me as my own. For my 
associates on the State ticket I dare vouch also 
that they are govei-ned by no narrow or pre- 
scriptive ideas. Some of them — perhaps all 
of them — are members of the American organ- 
ization, but they represent not the bigoted and 
proscriptive spirit which can see no worth even 
in any man born upon foreign soil, and whose 
blind fanaticism seeks its ends even through 
violence, and bloodshed ; but that liberal 
Americanism which makes principles and char- 
acter and not birth place the test of qualifica- 
tion for citizenship, and which proposes to ac- 
cord freely to^ all, wherever born, who are in 
heart Americans, all the privileges of American 
citizens. Whether I am mistaken in this or not 
in one thing I cannot be mistaken. The Amer- 
icans whom these gentlemen represent do at 
this moment unite in regarding Freedom and 
R-.'form as the paramount objects of political 
action at this moment, and they do join with 
all who, outside of their organization, are/williug 
to join with them in the attainment of these ob- 
jects. It is not, I am sure, an unreasonable ex- 
pectation that men animated by such a spirit 
will so revise their declaration of principles and 
policy as to leave in them nothing justly ob- 
noxious to the charge of proscriptiveuess or in- 
tolerance. Let ns unite now for the great ob- 
jects of our union, and generously aud fearless- 
ly trust the luture. 

But what are our opponents, who denounce 
us as fusionists— who seek to hold us responsible 
for the destruction of the ballot boxes at Ciu- 
ciiniati, and for the blood.shed at Louisville— 
who hurl at their fellow citizens throughout the 
State such epithets as dark lantern conspirators, 
midnight assassins, murderers of women and 
children— what are they doing? Dave they not 
a pet fusion of their own Y What says the 'Jin- 
cinnati Enquirer, the principal administration 
paper of Southera Ohio, edited by the United 



17 



States Marshal tor the Southern District? Here 
is a passage which I find credited, as I doubt not 
correctly to that point. 

"The Democrats, en masse, the old line Whigs, 
the National Know-Nothings and Union-loving 
men will combine in one great ma?s, forgetting 
all distinction when the Union is in danger, and, 
from the Ohio river to the great Lakes, will 
charge Abolitionism with a vigor and spirit that 
will be irresistible, and lead to a brilliant and 
annihilating victory." 

This looks very much like a fusion; and a fu- 
sion, too, of a most remarkable character. Dem- 
ocrats, Whigs and Now-Nothings arc to "cowi- 
6me." That great master of language, Edmund 
Burke, once said, "When bo.d men combine, good 
men should unUe.'" I do not say that those 
who, accoi'ding to the Enquirer, "will cotnbine," 
are bad men, but certainly the editor isuot very 
felicitous in his choice ot expression. Then 
what is the object of the combination? It is to 
"charge Abolitionism." By "Abolitionism'' 
they mean Republicanism. It is to resist the 
union of the people for the sake of Freedom, 
that the Democrats are to combine with old line 
Whigs and National Know-Nothings. Now, 
who are the old line Whigs? Why, those Whigs 
■who, unmindful of the ideas of 1776, and care- 
less of the great objects of the movement of the 
people, prefer to give aid and comfort to the 
party of thegadrainistratiou, rather than unite 
with the great mass of tbeir patriotic Whig 
brethren upon the platform and in support of the 
ticket of the 13th July! Why, those members 
of the American organization who prove by 
their action, that they prefer the triumph of the 
bitterest foes and most vehement denouncers 
of the Order, rather than the election of a man 
who stands shoulder to shoulder with nine- 
tenths of its members in defence of its own de- 
clared principle that "Freedom is national, and 
Slavery local." Now, what is the bond of such 
a combination as this? What can it be but hos- 
tility to the cardinal principle of the Republi- 
can Union — resistance to the spread of Slavery, 
and opposition to the aggressions ot the Slave 
Power? And in what an attitude do the admin- 
istration advocates of such a combination pre- 
sent themselves to the people? In the same 
breath, almost, they call upon the naturalized 
voters to come to the rescue of Democracy 
against the Ivnow-Nothings, and upon the Know- 
Kothings themselves — or rather upon the pro- 
slavery Know-Nothings — the very men and the 
only men in the American Order who insist on 
the proscription of the foreign born citizens, 
and who, if any body, are responsible for the 
very violences which the administration men 
denounce — to come to the rescue of Democracy 
against Republicanism! What wonderful con- 
sistency! The very heaven grows black with 
storm — the tempest of the people's wrath dar- 
kens round them — the great deep of popular in- 
dignation threatens to engulph them — and then 
the captains of the administration fleet, bound 
South to Slavery and a market, cry out, in the 
extremity of their distress, to "old line Whigs" 
and "National Know-Nothings," to pro-Slavery 
men of all sorts and colors, "Save, 0! save, us 
or we sink!"' 



And now, fellow citizens, notice with what 
earnestness the Washington Union appeals to 
the democratic crews not to aljandon the decks 
and quit the ships in prospect of a combination 
with buch allies. Here is an extract from that 
paper, Pierce's organ, printed at Washington, at 
the very door of the White House. Mark its 
plaintive, beseeching tone: 

"Will the democratic crew abandon the deck 
or their guns because the man at the wheel be- 
longs to this or that mess, or because the lieu- 
tenants are suspected of keeping queer company 
when ashore?" 

Why, fellow citizens, it does seem as if the 
leaders imagined that the democratic masses 
were bereft of common sense and capable ot be- 
ing led into any combination and used for any 
purpose. 

Where are the old democratic principles? 
Where are the spirit-stirring cries of Reform ! 
Equal Laws guarding Equal Rights! Exact Jus- 
tice to all men! Eternal hostility to every form 
of tyranny over the mind or body of man ? All 
silent now. The grave is not more silent. The 
lips which once uttered those watchwords are 
silent in death. Jefferson is gone ! Instead of 
the days when there were giants upon earth, 
the days have come of small men with low aims. 
Instead of Jefferson we have a Pierce. Instead 
of justice behold oppression. Instead of the ex- 
tension of Liberty we have the propagandism of 
Slavery. 

Is it not time for us fellow-citizens, to arouse? 
Is it not time for us to discard personal prejudi- 
ces and petty jealousies, and look at men and 
events in the calm light of reason? Is it not 
time for all true men to unite in defence of 
Freedom and for the sake of Reform ? I rejoice 
to be able to say that the people are everywhere 
answering these questions in the afiirmative. 
Here and there the efforts of disorganizers and 
factionists have done some mischief; but the 
great moss of the people are sound and immova- 
ble. 1 have visited many of the counties. Among 
others, I have been in old Ross, in Fairfield, in 
Morgan, in Monroe, in Harrison. Everywhere I 
find the people looking forward to the second 
Tuesday of October iu the assumed confidence 
of a glorious triumph. The same assurances 
reach me from other counties which I have not 
visited. All things augur victory. Let us then 
go forward boldly. " Our cause is just." Let 
our trust be in God. Let every man do his du- 
ty and his whole duty. The event is eagerly, 
anxiously awaited in every part of the land. 
The vote of the second Tuesday of October is to 
determine whether Ohio will remain faithful to 
Freedom or succumb to Slavery. God grant 
that on the coming of that day, upon the wings 
of the lightnings, the glad tidings may be borne 
to every part of the laud that the First bora of 
the Ordinance still adheres and will forever be 
true to its great principles. 

NoTE.^-This speech has been hastily prepared for pub- 
lication, as the best form in which to answer the most 
prominent charges against Mr. Chase, as the Republican 
candidate for Governor. Some of the topics are treated 
perhaps more fully than they were in that particular 
speech — but not more fully than they have been in other 
speeches during the canvass. 



APPENDIX. 



EXTRACTS FROM SPEECHES IN THE SENATE. 



It has been charged that the views of Mr. 
Chase on the Slavery q^e^tion. as set forth in 
his speech in Cincinnati and in his speeches in 
various other places, are not the same as those 
he has heretofore entertained and expressed. 
The following extracts from his speeches made 
in the United States Senate, when he was a 
member of that body, will show that this charge 
is not true. His views on the subject of Slave- 
ry are clearly set forth in the following extracts 
made from his speeches in the United States 
Senate, as reported in the Globe. In a speech 
deJivered March 26th, 1850, he said : 

" We have power to legislate on the subject 
of Slavery in the States. "We have power to 
prevent its extension, and to prohibit its exis- 
tence within the sphere of the exclusive juris- 
diction of the General Goverumeiit. Our duty, 
therefore, is to abstain from interference with it 
in the States. It is also our duty to prohibit 
its extension in the National Territories, and 
its continuance where we are constitutionally 
responsible for its existence." 

March 2(ith, 1850, he said : 

" We llud on the contrary extreme care to 
exclude these ideas from the Constitution. Nei- 
ther the word 'slave' or 'slavery' is to be found 
in any provision. There is not a single expres- 
sion which charges the National Government 
with any responsibility in regard to Slavery. 
No power is conferred on Congress either to es- 
tablish or sustain it. The framers of the 
Constitution left it where they found it. exclu- 
sively in and under the jurisdicti(m of the States. 
Whenever Slaves are referred to at all in the 
Constitution, whether in the clause providing 
for the apportionment of representation and 
direct taxation, or in that stipulating for the 
extradition nt fugitives from service, or in that 
restricting Conirress as to the prohibition of im- 
portation or migration, they are spoken of, not 
as persons held as prop(!rty, but as persons held 
to service or having their conditions determined 
under Stale laws. We learn, indeed, from de- 
bates in the Constitutional Convention, that the 
idea of property in men was excluded with 
special solicitude. 

"No person ' ♦ • * phall be deprived of life, 
liberty, or property, without due process of 
law." Cons, amend, art. 5. 

In nsy judgment, sir, if this amendment had 
never been made, Congress would have had no 



power to institute Slavery; that is to say, to en- 
force by its laws, the subjection of one man to 
the absolute control and disposal of another 
man; for no such power is conferred by the Con- 
stitution, and the action of Congress must be re- 
strained within its delegated powers. But the 
amendment is an express guarantee of personal 
liberty. It is an express prohibition against 
its invasion. So long as it remains a part of 
the Const.itution, and is obeyed, slavery cannot 
be constitutionally introduced any where, by 
the legislation of Congress. It must depend, 
and depend wholly, upon State law, both for ex- 
istence and support. Beyond State limits, with- 
in the boundaries of the United States, there 
can be constitutionally no slave." 

In January, 1854, he remarked :— 

"Sir, our offence is, that we deny the nation- 
ality of slavery. No man can sliow that we 
have ever sought to int(;rfere with the legisla- 
tion of any State of the Union upon that subject. 
All that we have ever insisted upon is, that the 
Territories of this Union shall be preserved 
from slavery; and that where the General Gov- 
ernment exercises exclusive jurisdiction, its leg- 
islation shall be on the side of liberty." 

And again in February, 1854 — 

"My general view upon this subject is simply 
this: Slavery is the subjection of one man to the 
absolute disposal of another man by force. Mas- 
ter and slave, according to the principles of the 
Declaration of Independence, and by the law of 
nature, are alike men, endowed by their Creator 
with equal rights. Sir, Mr. Piuckney was right, 
when, in the Maryland House of Delegates, he 
exclaimed, 'By the eternal principles of justice, 
no man in the State has a right to hold his slave 
for a single hour.' Slavery then exists no where 
by the law of nature. Wherever it exi.sts at all, 
it must be through the sanction and support of 
municipal or State legislation. 

Upon this state ol things the Constitution 
acts. It recognizes all men as persons. It con- 
fers no power, but on the contrary, expressly 
denies to the Government of its creation all 
power to e.'^tablish or continue slavery. Congress 
has no more power under the Constitution to 
make a slave than to make a king; no more 
power to (establish slavery than to establish the 
Inquisition. 

At the same time the Constitution confers no 
power on Congress; but on the contrary, denies 
all power to interfere with the internal policy 
of any State, sanctioned and established by its 



10 



own Coastitution and by its own legislation, 
in respect to the personal relations of its inhab- 
itants. The States, under the Constitution, 
are absolutely free from all interference by 
Congress in that respect, except, perhaps, m 
the case of war or insurrection; and may legis- 
late as they please within the limitations of 
their own Constitutions. They may allow sla- 
very if they please, just as they may license other 
wrongs, but State laws, by which slavery is al- 
lowed and regulated, can operate only within 
the limits of the State, and can have no extra 
territorial effect." 

As to his views on the subject of the territo- 
ries, they are clearly set forth in the following 
extracts taken from the same source. June 6, 
1850, he said: 

"For myself, I hold that the Constitution ex- 
tends to the territories, and in this we nearly 
all agree; but we differ widely as to the effects 
of the Constitution upon personal rights. For 
my own part, so long as the Constitution re- 
tains unaltered that provision which denies to 
Congress all power to deprive any person of lib- 
erty without due process of law, I shall not be- 
lieve that any person can be held in the territo- 
ries as a slave without a violation of that instru- 
ment." Cong. Globe, vol. 21, pt. 2, p. 1146, 
June 6, 1850. 

March 27, 1850, he said: 

'■In my judgment, also, neither the Govern- 
ment of the United States, nor any territorial 
government is or can be constitutionally author- 
ized to institute slavery, any more than a mon- 
archy, or a national religion, or the inquisition." 
Cong. Globe, vol. 22, pt. 1, App. p. 378. March 
27, 1850. 

"For myself I can not doubt upon the sub- 
ject. The power to provide governments for 
the territories, and to prescribe just limits to 
their action, is clearly given by the Constitu- 
tion. It has been exercised under every Ad- 
ministration, and by nearly every Congress 
since the organization of the Government. 
Whatever differences of opinion there may have 
been as to the existence or limits of other pow- 
ers, there has been very little as to this. 
The power to prohibit slavery in the territo- 
ries, is, in my judgment, clear and indisputa- 
ble, and the duty of exercising it is imperative 
and sacred." 

" But we are told that if Congress prohibit 
slavery in the Territories, or abolish slavery or 
the slave trade in this District, or fail to pro- 
vide adequate securities for the return of runa- 
way slaves, the South will dissolve the Union ! 
This cry, Mr. President, neither astonishes nor 
alarms me. I have never thought, nor do I 
now think, that any man should be deterred by 
it from an honest, fearless discharge of his duty 
here. It is an old cry, not without profit to 
those who have used it." From the same. 

His confidence in the people, that they would 
vindicate the cause of freedom against the sla- 
very disunionists who were about depriving the 
free States of all benefits arising from the Mis- 
souri Compromise, is shown by the following 
remarks made by him Feb. 4, 1854 : 



" Sir, I believe we are upon the verge of an- 
other era. That era will be the Era of Reac- 
tion. The introduction of this question here, 
and its discussion, will greatly hasten its ad- 
vent. We who insist upon the denationaliza- 
tion of slavery, and upon the absolute divorce 
of the General Government from all connection 
with it, will stand with the men who favored 
the compromise acts, and yet wish to adhere to 
them in their letter and in their spirit, against 
the repeal of the Missouri prohibition. But you 
may pass it here. You may send it to the other 
House. It may become a law. But its effect 
will be to satisfy all thinking men that no com- 
promises with slavery will endure except so 
long as they serve the interests of slavery, and 
that there is no safe and honorable ground for 
non-slaveholders to stand upon, except that of 
restricting slavery within State limits, and ex- 
cluding it absolutely from the whole sphere of 
Federal jurisdiction. The old questions be- 
tween political parties are at rest. No great 
question so thoroughly possesses the public 
mind as this of slavery. This discussion will 
hasten the inevitable reorganization of parties 
upon the new issues which our circumstances 
suggest. It will light up a fire in the country 
which may, perhaps, consume those who kindle 
it. 

I cannot believe that the people of this coun- 
try have so far lost sight of the maxims and 
principles of the Revolution, or are so insensi- 
ble to the obligations which those maxims and 
principles impose, as to acquiesce in the viola- 
tion of this compact. Sir, the Senator from 
Illinois tells us that he proposes a final settle- 
ment of all territorial questions in respect to 
slavery, by the application of the principles of 
popular sovereignty. What kind of popular 
sovereignty is that wMch allows one portion of 
the people to enslave another portion ? Is 
that the doctrine of equal rights ? Is that the 
teaching of enlightened, liberal, progressive 
Democracy ? No. Sir ; no ! There can be no 
real Democracy which does not fully maintain 
the rights of man, as man. Living, practical, 
earnest Democracy imperatively requires us, 
while carefully abstaining from unconstitutional 
interference with the internal regulations of 
any State upon the subject of Slavery, or any 
other subject, to insist upon the practical appli- 
cation of its great principles in all the legisla- 
tion of Congress. 

I repeat, sir, that we who maintain these 
principles will stand shoulder to shoulder with 
the men who, differing from us upon other ques- 
tions, will yet unite with us in opposition to 
the violation of plighted faith contemplated by 
this bill. There are men, and not a few, who are 
willing to adhere to the compromises of 1850. 
If the Missovri prohibition, which these compro- 
mises incorporates and preserves among its own 
provisions, shall be repealed, abrogated, broken 
up, thousands will say, away with all compro- 
mises — they are not worth the paper on which 
they are printed; we will return to the old 
principles of the Constitution; we will assert 
the ancient doctrine — that no person shall be 
deprived of life, liberty or property, by the leg- 
islation of Congress, without due process of 



law. Carrying out that principle into its prac- 
tical application, we will not cease our efforts 
until slavery shall cease to exist, wherever it 
can be reached by the constitutional action of 
the Grovernment." 

Wo have italicised that part of his remarks 
wherein he declares that men of all parties will 
unite in resisting slavery extension, however 
much they may differ politically on other ques- 
tions. Let it be remembered that these remarks 
were made in February 1854, before any steps 
for a " Fusion "had been taken. In them will 
be found the explanation of his present political 
position. He is willing " to stand shoulder to 
shoulder" with any man who will unite with 
him in resisting the encroachments of the slave 
power, however much he may differ froin him on 
minor political questions. On this basis the 
Republican party has been founded — on it, it 
triumphed last year, and will triumph again 
this. 

The question is sometimes asked, is Mr. Chase 
an Abolitionist ? The following debate which 
took place between him and Mr. Clay, in Feb- 
ruary, 1851, will throw light on that subject, as 
well as his views of the Union. 

Mr. Clay — At Springfield the other day, a 
meeting declared that Constitution or no Con- 
stitution, Union or no Union, law or no law, 
they wished the non-execution of the Fugitive 
Slave Law within the limits of that Common- 
wealth. Did the Senator suppose we had under- 
taken the Herculean task of pacifying his 
friends, or at least those who think with him on 
general subject of abolition ? 

Mr. Chase — Does the Senator mean to enu- 
merate me among those who have expressed a 
wish for the dissolution of the Union ? 

Mr. Clay — No sir, I only meant to say that 
the Senator is in bad company. 

Mr. Chase — If the Senator will bo so kind as 
to allow me to add a word, I will say that if I 
*am in bad companj' I do not know it. 

Mr. Clay — I mean in the company of Aboli- 
tionists. If the Senator will disavow and repu- 
diate the Abolitionists of all shades and culors, 
I should be truly happy to hoar him. 

Mr. Chase — I do disavow most emphatically all 
aseociation or connection Milh any class of per- 



20 

sons who desire the disssolution of this Union 
say now, as I said at the last session, that "wf 
of the West are in the habit of looking upon this 
Union as we look upon the arch of Heaven, with- 
out a thought that it can ever decay or fall." In 
this sentiment I fully participate. I am aware 
that there are some Abolitionists or anti-slavery 
men — names are of little consequence — who re- 
gard the Constitution as at war with moral obli- 
gation and the supreme law. I am not of them 
But if the Senator, when denouncing Abolition 
ists, means to include in his reproaches all those 
citizens who, within the limits of Constitutional 
obligation, seek to rescue this Government from. 
all connection with slavery, I can claim no ex- 
emption. I am one of those who mean to exer- 
cise all legitimate Constitutional power to re- 
strict slavery within the limits of the slave 
States, and in all places under the exclusive ju- 
risdiction of the National Government, to main- 
tain every person, of whatever race or origin, iu 
the enjoyment of personal freedom. That is my 
position. 

Mr. Clay— Mr. President, I am perfectly 
aware of the infinite variety of abolitionism. I 
have not yet heard the Senator disavow aboli- 
tionism. 

Mr. Chase — I do not know what the Senator 
means by the term. 

Mr. Clay — Disunion abolitionism. 

Mr. Chase — I do not know to what class of 
persons the Senator means to refer, when he de- 
nounces and stigmatizes people as abolitionists. 
If he, by that epithet, intends to designate that 
class of persons of whom I say I am one, who 
wish to maintain the Union, but not to allow 
slavery within the sphere of the exclusive juris- 
diction of the National Government, then I am 
doubtless an abolitionist. But, if by that term, 
he intends only to describe those who would 
brcaiv up the Union, or interfere with the State 
legislations by which slavery is maintained with- 
in State limits, I do not acknowledge its appli- 
cability to me. 

On the 22d March, 1852, referring to doctrines 
advanced by Senator Rhett. of South Carolina, 
on the Fugitive Law, he said: 

"I will say, now, that, so far as the honorable 
Senator a(]\ances the doctrines of State rights 
which Jeflerson and Madison inculcate, I agree 
with him; so far as he advocates the doctrine of 
disunion, I dissent from him wholly, utterly, here 
and every where." 



i Ui^ L. 



.■♦•SR \V(i. 



4i 



